Sam Parnia’s position in his own words:
Thank you Thomas for finding this. It is well worth a listen for all those who follow this blog and the AWARE studies. All the key positions are covered in the interview, and most importantly Parnia puts himself in the camp of scientists who believe that the brain hosts consciousness rather produces consciousness. Here is the link where you can find the 25 min audio clip:
In general it was a really good interview. He comes across as extremely rational, thoughtful and balanced. I really liked his in depth explanation of the issues around medium term cellular viability, reperfusion injury and how the latter might be prevented. This is a big deal in the CPR world.
However, there are some positions he takes that I just cannot agree with, and that is not because I am experiencing cognitive dissonance (his explanation for people being unable to understand the idea of dualism when their minds are grounded in materialism). For me it is lack of evidence, or even evidence to the contrary that causes me to disagree with him on a few points, but also agree on others:
On prevalence of NDEs:
On remembering NDEs: he uses a “lunch” analogy and everyone remembers that they had lunch a week ago but don’t always remember what they had. Might be a useful analogy, but in his case not helpful to his position that most people have NDEs but can’t remember them. This analogy would suggest that if you had an NDE, you might not remember the details (although people tend to) but you would remember that you had an NDE. I use this in my book when discussing the issue of only 10% of elderly adults having recall.
On prevalence of lucid experiences:
He also says that he has evidence which suggests that many, if not all, are having lucid experiences during CPR. Unless he has something that he hasn’t presented, he does not have evidence to suggest this at all. He just has EEG signals not associated with anything other than performing CPR. Specifically he says:
“Conclusively, 40% of EEG changed to near normal up to 1 hour after”.
Firstly, 40% is not most people, but even the 40% is a bit of a stretch. This is taken directly from the AWARE II paper:
Importantly, near-normal/physiological EEG consistent with consciousness also emerged: delta, theta activity in 22% and 12% respectively (up to CPR 60 minutes), alpha 6% of data/images (up to CPR 35 minutes) and beta 1% (Fig. 2B).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2023.109903
If you add them all up they come to 40%, but delta and theta are associated with deep (dreamless) sleep or drowsiness, only alpha and beta are regarded as being associated with being awake or conscious, so at a push you might be able to say that only 7% had EEG that might be indicative of consciousness. (Mery, or Tim…pretty please…comment here). I am not an expert on EEG, but that is my understanding using this article as a source.
Link to an article on EEG and consciousness
I get why Sam is doing this, but I am not completely certain about it being 100% accurate. He is implying that nearly everyone has conscious activity during CPR. That is, putting it as politely as I can and given the data from his paper, not aligned with the facts.
RED vs NDE:
He says this distinction is important to differentiate experiences. Won’t go there, but I still prefer NDE.
On the process of dying
He describes it in terms of a process, a grey area, rather than binary dead vs alive. In physiological terms, I would agree…the grey area is between the definition of medical death (absence of vitals signs) and irreversible death (the legal definition and the source of a rather horrid falling out with Tim). Given the enduring viability of brain cells, the body is not permanently dead, but in terms of consciousness, it may be different, and that is where his hypothesis about disinhibition is interesting.
On his disinhibition discussions around 22:20
He says they have uncovered the mechanism that explains what may be going. Flatlining of the brain removes braking systems, people then get access to dormant parts of their brain and are able to access new dimensions of reality. This is a real experience that emerges with death.
If your brain has stopped working, how can you access dormant parts of it? Despite the wobbly rationale deployed, I like the disinhibition idea, and that the tethering normally holding the consciousness to the brain, is being released, but I think he needs to be lighter on the details as he has no real evidence for anything more than something may be going on. However, he has to build a bridge for materialists to walk over, and using the terms he does may achieve this.
Bad NDEs
He dismisses horrible NDEs as not being NDEs again, and attributes them to waking up in the ICU. This is contrary to the evidence provided in papers on negative NDEs. Been discussed before, so won’t go there again.
Overall a really good interview, that puts beyond any doubt his position on dualism, but I wish he would stick to what the evidence specifically allows for, rather than speculating way beyond those boundaries. That would be boring though and not be good entertainment, or newsworthy.

